Case 2307547/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v NFS Hotel Technology Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2307547/2020
- Decision date
- 13 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Andrews JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge K Andrews found that Mr Y Patel was unfairly dismissed by NFS Hotel Technology Limited. The respondent did not attend. The judgment also records that the claimant had been paid his notice period and statutory redundancy payment.
The tribunal ordered compensation by way of a compensatory award. It assessed loss of earnings from 28 September 2020 to 28 September 2021 at £2,380 per month, giving £28,560, then deducted £246.93 for earnings by mitigation and added £450 for loss of statutory rights. The resulting award was £28,763.07.
The judgment applies the Recoupment Regulations. It states that the monetary award was £28,763.07, the prescribed element was £28,560.00, the prescribed period was 28/09/20 to 13/12/22, and the amount by which the award exceeded the prescribed element was £203.07. Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It recorded that he had been paid his notice period and statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £28,763 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £28,763
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £28,763
- compensatory remedy recorded
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.